[New-imc] network membership application for TN IMC

[Arc]

On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:37:01AM -0500, Ryan Smith wrote:
> g. Adopt a decision-making policy that is in alignment
> with consensus principles which include open,
> transparent and egalitarian processes,
> Regarding consensus, we have adopted the principles of
> the peace coalition.  In all efforts we strive for
> consensus as the modus operandi of the TN IMC.  When
> consensus is not possible we will make decisions by
> 3/4 majority vote.

3/4 majority fallback vote is not consensus.

The principals of consensus, which are important because they create a
positive atmosphere of social change and equal participation, rely on
the individual's ability to speak his or her own truth.  The power of
blocking, even if it is never used, must be present to ensure that no
voice is ignored.

Any form of majority voting, wether it be 50%+, 2/3rd's, 3/4'rd, or even
"consensus minus one", is not consensus. It promotes a social atmosphere
where participants play political games within the group, forming
alliances and, over time, either creating divisions within the group or
one group becomming dominant and removing everyone else from the group.
Even with consensus minus one, when one individual cannot block on their
own they'll "team up" with another member and mutually support
eachothers blocks.  Not only are such divisions self-destructive but it
creates a tense social structure where new members feel the need to join
one of the divisions, also called a block or clique, or leave the group.

Having majority voting to consensus is just for appearences sake.  Very
few people will ever block in consensus if they know the group will then
vote anyways.

Consensus is about everyone "winning", about everyone being able to work
with the decidions being made by the group.  It's not easy, it's a
process of social change within the individual members as much as the
group itself, and the group may find itself "held back" by new members
who insist on blocking everything they dont agree with, using the power
to block as a way to attempt to control others in the group.  This can
often be kept in check by requiring voting members to contribute to the
IMC and through creating a social atmosphere where this is unacceptable.

Any form of majority voting, wether it be 2/3rds, 3/4rds, or consensus
minus one, is a "win - loose" situation.  It creates an atmosphere where
members feel the need to have power over others, to play silly political
games and where they feel defensive against other members of the group.
While the group may be more productive, decidions made faster, it
results in the social fabric of the group breaking down and eventually
the group becomming the opposite of the world we strive to create.

We've seen what it leads to, the exact same things I described above
continue to this day in NYC - where the IMC is divided into three
distinct fractions, where members of one group were kicked out of the
IMC (for being Anarchists) despite several people blocking it, where the
video crew has found it nessesary to move into a seperate space for
social-political reasons.. while the IMC as a whole is quite productive,
at what social cost does this productivity come at?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/new-imc/attachments/20030519/2980c5a4/attachment.pgp